Ever since the Abortion Law Reform Act was passed, there have been health professionals campaigning for section 8 to be amended.

The particular subsection that has caused the controversy deals with what is known as 'mandatory referral'.

It says doctors with a conscientious objection to abortion treating a woman who seeks advice on a termination must "refer the woman to another registered health practitioner...who the practitioner knows does not have a conscientious objection".

Petitions with hundreds of signatures of doctors in favour of amending section 8 have been tabled in the Victorian Parliament.

The Australian Medical Association of Victoria - that publicly supported the decriminalisation of abortion - is also in favour of the amendment.

Professor Nicholas Tonti-Filippini is the head of bioethics and an associate dean at the John Paul II Institute in Melbourne. He says the issue of mandatory referral is a serious one.

"If they [the doctors] believe the child in the uterus is a human person, then to refer for abortion is basically to be complicit in the killing of that person."

Patty Kinnersly is the chief executive of Women's Health Grampians. She says that's a misunderstanding.

"That's actually not the case, doctors only have to provide a referral to somebody else who will provide care, not necessarily an abortion."

Declaring a conscientious objection

A previous solution proposed by the AMA is for doctors to put up a sign in their waiting room informing patients they don't deal with patients seeking an abortion.

Professor Tonti-Filippini says that's no longer an option for doctors since the Medical Board of Victoria launched an investigation into a doctor, Mark Hobart, who refused to refer a patient on the grounds they wanted a boy rather than a girl.

He says doctors are now reluctant to declare their conscientious objection.

"Because it's been made plain by the board they would pursue doctors who indicate they've got this conscientious objection."

Is it a matter of doctors' rights or women's rights?

People opposed to section 8 see this as a test case of the state's abortion law, but Ms Kinnersly says it's an extreme case that is a distraction from the main issue: giving women access to services.

"It's important to protect women and women's rights. What we want from our GPs is to give us accurate medical attention and care, we don't go and see them for moral and ethical support."

Professor Tonti-Filippini disagrees on both counts.

"The doctors will be giving them advice. It's just nonsense to say they are being deprived of something.

"If you go to the doctor and you're a smoker, the doctor will give you moral advice about not smoking. When you go to a doctor you expect to get moral advice."

Both sides confident of success

What is certain is the debate will continue to rage. Both parties are confident they will be vindicated by the State Parliament.

Ms Kinnersly says the act is a very solid piece of legislation.

"Victoria's not a state that tos and fros with legislation on the whim of a few doctors that are unhappy, we're confident it will remain."

On the other hand, Professor Tonti-Filippini believes if a private member's bill was introduced to the State Parliament, it would have a good chance of being passed.

"I know it would have support in the lower house, there's not so much certainty about the upper house. I think section 8 is quite obviously in breach of the national codes of all the medical organisations and needs to change."